DSL Debacles and Competitor Cheats
OK, so I need DSL at a few locations, so I check out pricing, find a good reputable provider, and book the orders. We do this all the time, right? It's a no brainer.
But what happens if one of those locations just happens to be in an area your phone company just doesn't want to service? And worse yet, what if they don't want anyone else to service it either? Do they let their competitor take the business anyway, leaving them with the line maintenance? Or do they say the line is no good? Well, if you think you can get away with it, why not lie? And so we begin a saga of how keeping competitors from serving an area can be as easy as the magic words "load coils"... because how do you prove they don't exist, and that this is a ruse to keep out service (violating tariffs galore)? Well, I do know one way...
Load coils, for the uninitiated, were impedence matching transformers that were placed on telcom lines that exceeded 6,000 feet to correct the effective capacitance of the copper line, reducing the frequency spectrum of end devices and reducing bandwidth. Note I said "were", not "are". Load coils have been removed from most lines because they preclude the ability of the phone companies to sell DSL and digital service (and actually ISDN, since you barely can get 56kbps, and can't get a 2B+D true ISDN connection either -- like we used to tell telcom execs during those ISDN seminars we did in the 1980's). Impedence matching issues, once handled by load coils, are now handled in sophisticated software in the switch - so if you've got a modern switch, you're OK.
So now to the problem at hand. I needed an additional DSL line in a location (note the word "additional" - yes, we've already got one and it's been operational for many years). Load coils were removed a decade ago from this location so Verizon (then GTE) could sell DSL, and everyone on the street bought it. Sounds simple, right?
Well, it turns out that Verizon doesn't remember that everyone already got DSL in this location years ago, as they contracted through other ISPs at the time (although they supplied the modem kit). Verizon didn't have a DSL division then like they do now, but they did have a T1 service division who didn't like DSL and didn't want anything to do with a cheaper service. They washed their hands of the entire area and let competitors handle the business. The problem is, Verizon is a big company, and the side that repaired the DSLAM a few weeks ago on one line didn't mention to their now-established DSL online group that everyone here has packets slipping and sliding down the wire.
And this is where things get interesting. The ISP is told by Verizon that they cannot install DSL at this location because the line is 12,224 feet from the box and "load coils" are used. Hmm, first problem is I can see the box, and it isn't 12,224 feet. Second problem is that I know it's an up-to-date switch that doesn't need load coils. And third problem is that I already have DSL running on one of their wires (with a new DSLAM card installed only last week when the old one failed) and since no DSL can operate with load coils, and I have operational DSL, there cannot be load coils installed.
Yet, here I am, sending emails over a DSL link (paid for monthly) installed and maintained by Verizon that Verizon says cannot be installed. Why is that?
As the DSL market has become more competitive, it isn't a stretch for a phone company to move from dislike for a competitor getting the "cream" of DSL service (while they maintain the lines) to actively denying service. Of course, that does violate many tariffs (especially on equal access for customers). But, as this little load coil parable demonstrates, proving they are lying isn't easy unless you run into an outright contradiction. So what can be done?
Aside from presenting this issue to the competitor who has suffered, a consumer can go to the state public utility commission and file a complaint. But don't expect this practice to vanish anytime soon. It's just too easy for a phone company to lie.